Queensland Drug and Specialist Courts Review – Final Report Page 1 THE AUTHORS Emeritus Professor Arie Freiberg AM Faculty of Law Monash University Dr Jason Payne Australian National University Dr Karen Gelb Karen Gelb Consulting Mr Anthony Morgan Australian Institute of Criminology Emeritus Professor Toni Makkai Australian National University DRUG AND SPECIALIST COURTS REVIEW TEAM Victoria Moore Director Julie Webber Principal Policy Officer Leigh Krenske Manager, Research and Evaluation Tara Linnan Project Manager Jamie-Lee Sykes Executive Support Officer Disclaimer The findings and recommendations in this paper reflect the views of the consultants engaged for the Review and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Queensland Government or current government policy. Queensland Drug and Specialist Courts Review – Final Report Page 2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We would like to acknowledge and thank the many people who gave their time and participated in the Drug and Specialist Courts Review. The knowledge and experiences that have been shared at workshops, interviews and individual meetings that took place over the course of the Review has been invaluable. The collaboration amongst government agencies has been demonstrated through the commitment and support shown by our inter-agency project team in contributing to the Review. This collaboration has extended to our non-government partners through their participation in the Specialist Court and Court Diversion Program Working Group. We would like to thank our government and non-government partners for providing continual support and guidance throughout the Review. We would also like to acknowledge the support of those magistrates who gave so generously of their time and shared their extensive knowledge and experiences of the former Drug Court and other court programs over the course of the Review. Particular thanks is extended to the Chief Magistrate Judge Rinaudo, Deputy Chief Magistrate O’Shea and Deputy Chief Magistrate Gardiner for their participation throughout the Review and for facilitating access to magistrates who presided over the former Queensland Drug Court and current members of the Therapeutic Jurisprudence Committee. We travelled throughout North and South-East Queensland and spoke to many government and non- government service providers, legal professionals and government agency representatives. Throughout the consultations it was clear that there are many people who are passionate and committed to their work and who were willing to share their passion, experiences and ideas for the future. We were able to consult with many people who were involved in the former Drug Court and, with their assistance we have been able to take lessons from the past to develop a better model for the future. Queensland Drug and Specialist Courts Review – Final Report Page 3 ABBREVIATIONS ABS Australian Bureau of Statistics ACT Australian Capital Territory AIC Australian Institute of Criminology AIHW Australian Institute of Health and Welfare ANU Australian National University AODT Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment ARC Assessment and Referral Court ATODS Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drug Services ATSILS Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Legal Service CAG Case Assessment Group CBT Cognitive Behavioural Treatment CCO Community Corrections Order CIN Cannabis Infringement Notice CISP Court Integrated Services Program CJG Community Justice Group CM Contingency Management DAAR Drug and Alcohol Assessment Referral DAES Drug Assessment and Education Session DCCSDS Department of Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services DDAP Drug Diversion Assessment Program DFV Domestic and Family Violence DJAG Department of Justice and Attorney-General DOHA Department of Health and Ageing DTO Drug Treatment Order DUMA Drug Use Monitoring Australia DVOs Domestic Violence Orders DWI Driving While Intoxicated FBT Family Behaviour Therapy GCDVIR Gold Coast Domestic Violence Integrated Response IDRO Intensive Drug Rehabilitation Order IDRS Illicit Drug Reporting System ISL Indigenous Sentencing List JP Justice of the Peace LAQ Legal Aid Queensland MET Motivational Enhancement Therapy MI Motivational Interviewing NADCP National Association of Drug Court Professionals NDARC National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre NGOs Non-government organisations NIDA National Institute of Drug Abuse NJC Neighbourhood Justice Centre NSW New South Wales NT Northern Territory PI Prize Incentives PTSD Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder QCR Queensland Courts Referral QCS Queensland Corrective Services QH Queensland Health QIADP Queensland Indigenous Alcohol Diversion Program QIARP Queensland Integrated Assessment and Referral Program QICR Queensland Integrated Court Referrals QMERIT Queensland Magistrates Early Referral into Treatment QNADA Queensland Network of Alcohol and other Drug Agencies QPS Queensland Police Service Queensland Drug and Specialist Courts Review – Final Report Page 4 RNR Risk, Need and Responsivity ROR-PPV Risk of Reoffending-Probation and Parole Version ROR-PV Risk of Reoffending-Prison Version SA South Australia SCCDP Special Circumstances Court Diversion Program SMS Scientific Methods Scale TC Therapeutic Community VAQ Victim Assist Queensland VBR Voucher-Based Reinforcement WA Western Australia WSIPP Washington State Institute of Public Policy Queensland Drug and Specialist Courts Review – Final Report Page 5 CONTENTS THE AUTHORS ......................................................................................................................................... 2 DRUG AND SPECIALIST COURTS REVIEW TEAM ...................................................................................... 2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................................. 2 ABBREVIATIONS ...................................................................................................................................... 4 SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................ 24 THE DRUG AND SPECIALIST COURTS REVIEW 24 DRUG COURTS AS PART OF A BROADER RESPONSE TO DRUG-RELATED CRIME 24 CURRENT DEMAND FOR ALCOHOL AND OTHER DRUG CRIMINAL JUSTICE INTERVENTIONS IN QUEENSLAND 25 DRUG TREATMENT SERVICES 26 GETTING THE LEGAL AND PROGRAM FOUNDATIONS RIGHT 27 IMPROVING THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM’S RESPONSE TO ALCOHOL AND OTHER DRUG ISSUES 27 MEETING THE NEEDS OF ABORIGINAL AND TORRES STRAIT ISLANDERS 30 REINSTATEMENT OF A QUEENSLAND DRUG COURT 31 OTHER PROBLEM-ORIENTED COURTS 33 RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................................... 34 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................... 51 CONDUCT OF THE REVIEW 52 OUTLINE OF THE REPORT 53 PART A .......................................................................................................... 55 1 FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTUAL ISSUES ....................................................................................... 56 1.1 INTRODUCTION 56 1.2 TERMINOLOGY 56 1.2.1 Why is terminology important? .............................................................................................................. 56 1.2.2 Specialist courts versus problem-oriented or solution-focused courts .................................................. 56 Queensland Drug and Specialist Courts Review – Final Report Page 6 1.2.3 Diversionary programs versus interventions .......................................................................................... 57 1.3 A NON-ADVERSARIAL APPROACH 58 1.4 THERAPEUTIC JURISPRUDENCE 59 1.5 SPECIALISATION OR MAINSTREAMING? 60 1.6 RESTORATIVE JUSTICE AND THE RIGHTS OF VICTIMS 62 1.7 SUBSTANCE ABUSE 63 1.8 CAUSE AND EFEFECT 63 2 A CONTINUUM OF INTERVENTIONS .......................................................................................... 65 2.1 INTRODUCTION 65 2.2 MODEL OF CURRENT INTERVENTION PROGRAMS 65 2.3 CRITERIA FOR INTERVENTIONS 67 2.3.1 The nature and seriousness of the offence ............................................................................................ 67 2.3.2 The history of involvement in criminal justice system ........................................................................... 67 2.3.3 Risk, need and responsivity .................................................................................................................... 67 2.4 CLEAR CONCEPTUALISATION OF PROGRAMS 68 2.5 A CLEAR LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK 68 2.6 PRINCIPLES 69 2.6.1 Proportionality ........................................................................................................................................ 69 2.6.2 Parsimony ............................................................................................................................................... 69 2.6.3 Minimising net-widening and sentence escalation ................................................................................ 69 2.6.4 Privacy .................................................................................................................................................... 70 2.6.5 Minimal coercion .................................................................................................................................... 70 2.6.6 Consent ..................................................................................................................................................